February 2008

February 29, 2008

It's not to be smug, but it is to point out a difference and a problem that is unfortunately part of any sales profession. It's a problem I can avoid.

The problem is conflict of interest. My difference is that I'm not attached to outcome.

Most salespeople are commission focused and when you're commission focused, that's a conflict of interest. No action on the part of the prospect equals no money. I do take the rule of working only with ready, willing and able prospects, especially as buyers, but my tag on that is to first qualify this question: are you really ready, willing and able?

I hate calling it the Platinum Rule, especially because there is such a degree of relativity to it, but the statement "do unto others as they would have you do unto them" is an uncommon practice and one I hope to continue. My clients work at a major employer in Colorado Springs and friends of theirs had used an agent who commonly gave rebates. My clients had worked with me before and it had gone well but they were wondering what I could still do on my commission out of reaction to the "deal" that their friends received. There are three ways of qualifying a deal: the cash someone got back, the "actual" savings a person reaped (did the sell at a pittance or buy too high?) and the third way: what else did the "deal" cost them? We had been in conversation and looked at some properties for a few months and today was a decision day: do it or don't. We had lunch, and we spent maybe three minutes on numbers. We spent the rest of the time on the emotional and psychological ramifications of selling in a slow-to-sell, risk-filled marketplace for two people who support and keep afloat IT systems for someone whose slogan used to be "when it absolutely, positively has to be there overnight." There is being a member of a company and then there is living a this company. Both of them are frequently on-call overnight. They also have two small boys.

Then there is "the deal": here are two people with $100K in equity wanting to sell one mid $400K's property and buy another one worth $50K more. The $50K more happens to be on sale for about $20K off of what it's really worth. The catch: to buy the one on sale, you have to build. That takes seven months. That means at least one, probably two moves. That means selling based on the miserable last four months of data and possible future price declines. That means corralling the life out of two small boys and keeping the house in total mint condition.

It's going to be a slower year and the chance to do almost $900K in business is sitting there. I asked them what kind of stress would five days of no showing activity do to them, and that one example was all the needed to realize: we're not the want-to-sell sellers that have power in this market. Technically, they could do it. They have the income, they certainly have the equity, and it could be done. But they have next to no free time, they would have great difficulty just keeping the house perfect which it has to be in this market. There is almost no way to go door to door on a great buy in this market because there isn't a lot of sitting inventory... the really good buys are if you take seven months and build (which really flies in the face of conventional wisdom).

My favorite part was that they came to their own conclusion which was not a "talk ourselves out of this" idea. They are moving. But in a year. The strategy then changed, based on their own needs and imagination, to paying down a bit more of the house and allowing their home to rebound just a skosh in value. Even better, seeing a simple demand up-turn in the market gives them the peace that they need that they'll be able to sell with confidence. Because it takes confidence in this market. There has to be a swagger that you're the best buy and the best condition. If it's not there... you're probably not. One year from now the kids are both in school, the dollars are a little readier, the "good deal" is $30K more expensive... but there are ways of planning for it to afford it between now and then.

My point in writing all of this is that I have an inventory that is pretty stable: it's not listings, it's relationships. I have a ton of people that will do business with me when they're ready. I'll council and walk with them until their ready.

February 28, 2008

Okay. I'm sorry. I'm a believer, a follower, a lover of Christ. This doesn't change that.

I just don't get it.

So I'm Rob Belling it today.

I'm saying - sigh - I don't have it nailed. I'd like to contribute to the conversation.I'm coming to no conclusions today. I'm leaving this one open.

I had a deal fall apart three months ago. It was in the midst of my worst quarter in real estate, ever. Two deals, one quarter. Previous low was 4. I didn't have three kids or a big house back then. I would have had three deals close, but Riv. Grove fell apart. So I had two.

I spent more running my business fourth quarter then I brought in in income. When you have a $4500 minimum monthly home budget, and your income/business runs red, that's bad.

The deal fell apart when the buyer "prayed about it."

That's right. That was the actual answer I was given. She prayed about it and the deal fell out.

Now, I don't want you to think that this is after the fact vindictiveness, or wounding or anything because it's not.

It's just that I was working on that file today and since I had a copy of the inspection report and a mere two items came up (both of which the seller fixed voluntarily anyways), I'm putting the inspection in the condo along with the addenda and covenants and other stuff. I noticed on the inspection today for the first time who the email address the inspection was sent to:

February 27, 2008

If economics and human behavior is the outcome of personal incentive, lets think what the incentive of Levitt and Dubner might be. I'll use real estate as an example in the whole construction of Freakonomics:1.) Hypothesize that asking oddball economic questions and answering them in an elite, Upper Westside Manhattan voice and supporting them with wonkish University of Chicago economic analysis will sell like crazy, bordering on phenomenon. Here's one that ought to get a charge: Real Estate Agents are like the Klu Klux Klan. That's sexy. Let's prove it. 2.) Design a test, and lets see if we can get some really garish results from other off-the-wall questions. Questions that are only about hot button issues: Crime, Abortion, Real Estate Commissions, the birtright outcome of your name. 3.) Start documenting the analysis under the latte sipping umbrella of the Sunday New York Times Magazine. Paint the Nerdy Super Hero in bold colors. It will look great in the pages preceeding the marital announcements of the rich and powerful.4.) Capitalize on the buzz with a blog. These are always sane voices, but they help us guide the conventional wisdom of the masses. Hey, just for giggles... what if we included some quote from Galbraith on Conventional Wisdom? Do you think they'd get the joke? Man, we're naughty!5.) So as we flush these ideas out, let's keep them statistically-focused and devoid of emotion. So after we start out by boiling tempers with REALTOR=KLANSMAN, let's get really scientific and gloss over some of the human emotions at play. Emotions from things like a normally perfectly rational and successful home owner's aversion to risk, a buyer's ability to close on a property quickly so the homeowner can have their baby in the new home, Buyer A has a crappy lender, Buyer B has a good lender and BUYER C has cash, a job relocation, a soon-to-adjust adjust mortgage or worse, a loss of job and the possibility of foreclosure in 3 to 6 months.Let's ignore all those things. Because a home is just a commodity afterall. 6.) Let's also dismiss or just not account for the fact that every real estate transaction happens because of change, and people classically show fully logical and sophisticated behaviors when confronted with change because they always embrace it and are so ready to live a life that is marked by constant change. At least our friends and colleagues on the Upper West Side of Manhattan and among the Academic Elite act this way.

Levitt and Dubner are at it again with my profession, and I'm a little frustrated that there are so few within my profession that don't point out some of the glaring assumptions inherent in Freakonomics whose broad generalizations are treated as gospel by so many. I'm not dismissing their practice or profession. But if there's is documenting incentives, I think Levitt himself has a big incentive in dinging REALTORS.

On yesterday's blog they posted a new slam dunk study done by Stanford economists so it carries some good academic mustard. It sites (surprise!) Levitt's own study on the Chicago-area real estate market. This new analysis is based on Stanford faculty properties (yes you read that right) in and around one of the most desirable kingdoms of real estate value in North America. In fact, it's home to my uncle. Who is my uncle? Let's just say Bill Gates isn't a fan. Rusty is one of the premier litigators in American history, and his property backs up to the Stanford campus. So if he's not in the statistical analysis, he's near it and increasing it's values and so is Neil Young. Let's just say that the sub-prime crisis isn't having a lot of effect on an area where the average acre is worth a million plus. Let's also say that it's not exactly a valid sampling of American property owners. It's a valid sampling of Stanford faculty property owners.

Here is Levitt's vested interest. Levitt himself is a real estate "investor" but it's a loose term to describe someone who is using real estate himself to inefficiently accumulate wealth. Maybe it's liberal academic guilt, but flipping houses requires that you pay a ton of taxes, and I personally wouldn't call that investing. Real estate is a beautiful tax shelter, and a flipper like Levitt can get financially-lacerated really easily performing his wealth-creating recreation. His motivation aside: Real estate does appreciate, but in the long term. Needing real estate to work like an IPO (which a flipper does) is kind of like putting a UHaul hitch on the Mini. Yeah, you can do it... but why? Levitt obviously has his own motivation for hypothesizing that real estate agents charge way too much, it's not the thing that he just stumbled upon, un-attached. As a quick reseller of homes, his need is to get in and get out quickly and make a maximum profit. Correspondingly he looks at real estate the way many consumers and many agents (unfortunately) look at it: you make money on the asset when you sell it. That's conventional thinking, something Dubner decides to wait another chapter to blow up. Too bad they're guilty of such conventional thinking, as are the folks at Stanford. It would be interesting if these studies were done by non-property owners who weren't so attached to outcomes that their shrine to self was worth so much.

What is surprising is that in this very focused analysis of commissions, a simple economic fact about markets never shows up. I'll demonstrate. Let's deal with something less variable, two sales of a stock (let's say Home Depot) at exactly the same moment for $82. Which of the two sellers came out ahead? You already know the answer if you've done this yourself: the person who bought for less. That's how markets work. Well guess what? Stanford and the University of Chicago are proving that markets work when they do their analysis by proving that neither sellers nor agents determine market values: buyers do. In all markets, sellers never set selling values but buyers always do. Is real estate for some reason not subject to market rules? You could ask $60K for your GMC Yukon if you wanted to. No one would offer it. Levitt could replace the kitchen of the house that used to belong to a mom and her crack dealing son that lived with her and ask an extra $100,000 for his $25K in improvement and work. So his agent couldn't get it for him... I guess buyers aren't dumb.

Money is made on the buy. I wonder if the University of Chicago or Stanford University could spend some time documenting that. Oh wait, they already have: in every other market they've studied.

I'll never forget showing a home four years ago (and yes, this has a lot to do with Forsberg). The Avs all-star team that amounted to squat was playing the Sharks in the Western Semis and I had to go show a home on a Saturday afternoon and was missing the game. It was my listing, a sign call, and the guy who wanted to see it had this thick Eastern European accent. I show up, get the lights on, he pulls up in this 20 year old smoking beater Subaru. But I can "tell" he's legit when he gets out. Blue sweatsuit, weird tinted eyeglasses, eccentric writ as large as can be. He shuffles in, says almost nothing aside froma few snorts here and there, and then his wife shows up. She is driving a new $40K Yukon, she's heavily made up, she has some sort of endearing "schmoogins" nickname for him which he, the eccentric, waves off with a heavy wave of his hand. She sizes up the house as liking a few rooms, it's close to work, but it needs a bigger kitchen. She kisses him, call him "Pokey", and leaves.

The dude stays around. He says "you have glass of water for me? Come talk with me." He waves his hand some more, admits he hates the house, but then says "what she want with kitchen? She no cook." He then proceeds to explain the last 100 years of western economic progress in five monutes and concludes with "In this life, there are three things. Be poor, be middle class, be rich. To me, be poor or be rich. Poor man happy with his goat. Rich man has to just find out. Middle Class: B*#%^#*@t!"

It was so out of the ordinary. It was so unusual. It was a mixed bag. I can't agree with anything else this racist, classist, judgmental eccentric had to share with me that day. But this phrase stuck.

Peter Forsberg should have never been the captain of the Flyers. Simon Gagne and a ten game losing streak are all reasons to not go there, but burdening that pure "has to just find out" with the tag of captain is silly. You can't contain a vagabond, creative spirit and then hope the rewards of leadership by a middle-class, lunch bucket management approach will also fit. You put the spirit in the midst of the muse and stand back. Peter Forsberg plays the game with such reckless abandon he ruptured a spleen in a game. He's had more concussions than girlfriends. He's gone through lengthy, board, melancholy droughts. He's also put up more four, five and six point games than almost anyone in history.

February 20, 2008

When I started my illustrious career in the fly fishing industry in 1993 (when I upgraded bait shops from Discount Fishing Tackle to All Pro Fish 'n' Sport... notice the double-apostrophed 'n') the "River Runs Through It' craze was in high gear. For all the fame and attention paid this sport, it's basic ideology is to make something of a basic human need (nourishment) into something abstract, expensive and if done well, obsessive (sport). So correspondingly there are plenty who "want" to pick up the sport, then they go out one time, see the vest with $2000 worth of flys, strange zingers, the funny glasses, the fancy rubber pants, the boots with felt (?!?), they don't see the fish let alone the tug on the end of the line, and well, you get the picture. In 1993, dudes were buying stuff. By 1996 they were hoping someone would open up an auction site to all the world, but since no had done that yet, the garage sales in the Denver metro area were a kind of Rich Dad paradise for fly shop connoisseurs.

I tell this story because it's about the evolution of the sport. On the wall behind the counter where we kept the fly lines we stocked Weight Forward, Double Taper, a couple Bass Bug lines for throwing relaly big flies that the standard Weight Forward could never chuck, three or four saltwater lines that had a different fish on the package and no other difference and a couple sinking lines. We sold the beginners the weight forwards and the rest a double taper. We sold the DT because it was a better value. Most Colorado fishing is done within 30 feet of your ankles, so you wear out only half a line. Once that was worn out, you flipped it over and used the other half. It was also more subtle and a better presenting line, easier to pick up off the water, etc. Okay, so where is this going?

Check this out. That's the online store for The Fly Shop in CA and just their fly line inventory. I think my head would have exploded in '93 considering the popularity of Rio's Versi-Tip system... here I was selling "expensive" $40 lines, and Rio now offers a set for $150. That's $150 for three different sinking lines. No, none of them float. It's a question of "are you fishing light, medium or heavy current?" and "fishing at 4 feet, 8 feet or 15 feet of depth?" In angling, that's specialized.
Today as then, flyfishing is a boutique industry. I will sell as much in real estate this year as my manufacturing employer Ross Reels (wher eI worked 1997 to 1999 in Montrose, CO) will sell in total equipment this year. I will sell my $10 million whatever in just the Pikes Peak Region. Ross will sell $10 million in rods, reels and pliers over an international dealer network of more than 500 shops and retailers. The only possible way for the fly fishing industry to stay viable and make any profit (even a nickel)... was to diversify their product offering. But how they diversified their product offering is the real lesson: they diversified by specializing.

If I wanted to chase stripers in Cape Cod in 1993 I had three options: a floating line, a sinking line or a shooting head. All of these options sucked. A shooting head would probably tear my reel to shreds, the floating line would work only in skinny water (where the fish rarely swam) and the sinking line would create ridiculous drag in the surf currents. When I chase them this June, I will use an intermediate line on one spool for the flats, a streamer express modified one-piece shooting head for the bay and boats, a straight shooting head for the surf and a floater in the event I see anything busting on the surface (not likely, but you think I'm going to miss out on that?) If I was fishing for the same damn species in Maine, I would probably not bring a floater at all but three different one-piece shooters, one with a floating running line for rips, an intermediate running line for out of canoes and kayaks and a full sink running line out of the boat and a fourth straight intermediate for any back bays or estuaries. I am bringing two rods to the Cape, on Maine I would probably need at least three, maybe four. For one fish. The only reason I'm down to two rods for the Cape if because I've been there and I'm restricting myself to areas I feel I know and have any shot at catching fish. If I was going out with a guide... I'd be broke after gearing up. Good luck even finding the double taper of old, no one uses them anymore. For my five weight "all-purpose" Colorado trout rod I have a floating distance line, a supple winter line, a full sink tubing line and a sink tip for some reason I can't remember but I had a good reason to buy it off the sale rack that day. Diversified... by specialization. I've been in each and every environment where I knew I had the wrong damn line on my rod. By "diversifying" I was generalizing. I learned... by doing. I am now truly diversified... by specializing my trade.

The same is true in skis. The same is true in fitness. The same is true at Starbucks. It's true in real estate. What was a "special" approach to selling a home in 1999 is now general and standard. To set my homes apart, I must stage, professionally photo, Web SEO to 1.2 million sites (not one), blog, Webshot, Facebook, clean furnace and bribe the kids to keep their rooms clean. I do that for the same fee I charged in 1999. Anything that wants to grow or remain viable has to diversify their product offering. But simply diversifying and doing something different that is really another generalization doesn't cut it. My dentist today was telling me about his brother's skis on their snowcat trip last week: K2 Pontoons. They actually curl at the tips and tails and in his words, "are about as wide as a snow shovel". If you hit a piece of crust, you're toast, the only thing touching is the area beneath your boots. But if you're in the deep... you're making the snowboarders sick with envy.

If you want to maximize your enjoyment, on the stream, in the snow, on the bosu, in your investments: diversify. But pledge to specialize first. Go general: it's a waste of time and money. Specialize: then can you show up with the right tool for the job.

February 19, 2008

"If you can't be number one at something... find something else to be number one. If you can't find something else to be number one at... invent something else." - This American Life

"Buy land, they ain't making it anymore" - Will Rogers

Remember the rage around Motley Fool? It was the late 90's, and everybody and their sister was putting money into Wall Street's irrational exuberance. A little club called the Motley Fool suddenly became a big club. Why? Because it informed consumers about the actual macroeconomics at work in America and the world, it forced people into doing their homework and understanding how and why companies worked, made money, were profitable and correspondingly, were worth investing in. As opposed to mutual funds, a big spread of stocks with such related fields as biotech, athletic apparel, petroleum, genetic engineering, big box retail and UAE banking all pooled into one "fund" where the consumer might know something about some of their stocks... Motley Fool said, "no, take charge, understand what you're doing. Don't take our advice. Learn it."

There are several ways of learning and attending a lecture is one of the least sticky. Just doing what someone else says to go and do is probably less than that. Going out and getting dirty, learning by making mistakes forces an interaction with the source material: and a better perspective on what to do and what not to do.

The investor who diversifies is smart to do so if they don't have the time, energy, or interest to actually make an income off of their cash. The vast majority are over-taxed with childcare, social events and other distractions to really dial in on any one area of real interest. Like our friend above, probably best to stick to the nice groomed trails for a while before you diversify your enjoyment with a rail.

But there is a lesson learned here. You need speed to get a rail. You need to lift your legs to get a rail. You need confidence that the two will happen in order and that you'll have balance to land on the rail. Once you land on the rail, you then have to stabilize, but do so in a fluid motion in order to ride and glide down the rail. Now: go and do it.

If it was easy, everyone would do it. The stoner teaching you on Saturday would have you landing daffy by 10:30. It's not easy. But then, why settle for easy?

There's a lot of media talk now starting to surface about maybe this is a good time to buy: buy land, buy a home, buy stocks. You'll also hear the words "diversify". If the timing is good now, why diversify? What's the motivation behind diversification? Did diversification really help those who got cleaned out in the stock bubble crash earlier this decade? Those who specialized may have been hammered worse and fell harder... but they were also able to rebound faster because they recognized the greater opportunity to buy more and buy cheaply.

If you're not interested in learning: diversify. Snowboard once a winter, ski twice a winter, fish once a year, go to a baseball game, stay changing channels. It's fine. Doesn't bother anyone.If you're interested in learning: rope off the time. It's worth it.

February 18, 2008

Thanks to Inman for the fun. A Gentle Advisory: This contains language that many - including me from time to time - may/will find offensive. In fact, I normally wouldn't post something like this if it wasn't for the fact that I've spent 18 months watching the sub-prime mess unfold after spending the previous three years wondering where on earth all these zero-down buyers were coming from for my listings. The fact that this uses stick men and obscenities to demonstrate how it works actually makes it understandable for the average citizen. Besides, the subprime/credit crunch/whatever... is obscene.

February 15, 2008

"Economic and social behaviors, Galbraith continued, 'are complex, and to comprehend their character is mentally tiring. Therefore we adhere, as though to a raft, to those ideas which represent our understanding.'" Levitt & Dubner, Freakonomics, p. 80

The Galbraith Dubner and Levitt refer to is John K. Galbraith, two-type Presidential Medal of Freedom winner, noted economist, and man who coined my beloved insult-phrase, "conventional wisdom". There was nothing conventional about Mr. Galbraith, but he saw a great deal of common thinking among the mass population, and the greater the commonality, the more likely it was understood as truth; even if it was false.

Our local real estate market is a brilliant example of Galbraith economics at work, for many buyers are hesitant to buy because it's a rough market for sellers.

Excuse me?

Let's run that through again: it's a rough market. Homes are sitting for a long time. People are writing low offers. Not sure if I want to buy into that kind of a market.

Uh huh.

Let's see, if Best Buy was asking consumers to "make an offer" on 52" Sonys.... that's obviously bad for Best Buy, so that's obviously bad for the consumer too, right? The other side of my cynic brain says "yes, but the 52" Sony will be obsolete technology the day you get it home. A home... isn't obsolete technology.

The macroeconomic participation of home-buying is worthy of hand-wringing. But what drives macroeconomics are variables. Because variables are, well, variable, and not, say, constants, there is the opportunity within variables for a variety of outcomes.

Buzz agents like Malcolm Gladwell talk about Tipping Points, and Michael Crichton writes novels like Jurassic Park that are about Chaos Theory in motion. As a resident of Northern El Paso County, I experience Chaos Theory daily in this great big tent called Colorado Weather. We got squat for snow yesterday because the front landed fifteen miles north of us in southern Douglas County, bounced off the Palmer Divide and had semis jack-knifing on I-25. Fifteen miles of difference spared us.

In December 2005, the average sold price soared in Colorado Springs. It got some very favorable media attention because it was over $270,000. "Oh what a wonderful real estate market we have!" was the conventional wisdom. Why was it the price so high? Because units sold were... down. There were fewer units selling, indicative of lower demand, but the ones that did sell were fat dollar properties. It was a selective read of selective numbers. Some of the rumblings of our present market began 18 months before in mid-2004. More homes listed in 2004 than any other year in Colorado Springs history and at the time, 2005 was right behind it. So while unit sales were up a lot in 2005, a ton of homes were already up for sale. No one really noticed because the ratio of supply and demand had remained constant: just as supply was climbing, so too was demand. The supply and demand ratios had stayed the same for three years due to an increase in popular buying demand. December was the first sign however that the demand was spent and supply had a lot of life left.The first three months of 2006 saw a slight increase in supply coming to market. It coincided with a slight downturn in demand. Prices-asked continued to climb, but prices-at-settlement were remaining stagnant. By April asking prices went up, selling prices went down, unit sales went down, months of inventory went up, new to market listings were up... and the trend officially commenced as a springboard to send everything topsy-turvy (see either My Annual Report or the Stat Pack for a graphical explanation).

It wasn't foreclosures. It wasn't an interest rate spike. It wasn't simple slowdown in demand. It wasn't Intel closing. It wasn't troops not returning. It wasn't our civic infrastructure. It wasn't Doug Bruce. It was stew. How do you know if it's gumbo or chili?

For a really accurate explanation of chaos theory at work in the microeconomics of private citizens, enjoy this spectacle:

I'm reading the Book of Acts with a group of four guys. The last time I read Acts in a group was in 1999.

In 1999 I was 23 years old. I was newly married. I liked the people I was with but they were not in the same position in life.

One couple was parenting a freshman in high school and a fifth grader.

The other couple was newly retired.

We were basically honeymooning.

I was two years out of college and off reading as that is all I did for four straight years. I was in Western Colorado and traveled very little. The majority of the people I knew were fly-chucking trout addicts, and while they were in 47 states and six provinces, the small-business, fish-obsessed, "we sniff a lot of fly -tying epoxy" world was remarkably similar across North America.

My world was very small. I'm reading it now and it's like a totally different book. I'm asking different questions. Why does Paul have an experience with Jesus, and not the Holy Spirit? The last eight chapters are all about the intersection of the Holy Spirit with the world, but in Paul's case, it's red letters, it's Jesus speaking to Paul not the Holy Spirit speaking to Paul.

One of the new ways of looking at my little real estate world, and the job that I'm in, is a delicious perspective on change. This is the Yoda of my profession, Larry Kendall:

Larry uses this technique, an old, time-tested sales technique in a radically different way. A way that is at least 2400 years old... Socrates used it. It's the Socratic method. Asking questions to pull answers, not pushing agendas to change other people, allowing other people to firsthand communicate their own change.

There are answers to how the family is. There are answers to how work is going. There are answers to "what do you hope to do with your work time-off and the family" this summer that get filed under dreams. But sometimes those answers involve change.

"The family is great."

"You know, I have a new manager, and after the old one left, things actually have improved quite a bit"

"Well since I've been there five years already, I get an extra week of vacation. And the kids don't know this yet, but we're going to try and get away for two weeks this year and go to Yellowstone. The kids are dying to go do some cool camping, and we think that will be really great."

Those are real estate answers.

At first blush, they're not. But because I'm a different person today than I was nine years ago when I last read Acts, I hear a very different story unfolding. A story that is not moving in a precise, theologically-predictable pattern, but one that literally unfolds before the disciples eyes. Shoot, some of the disciples aren't even we think they should be. The disciples are terrified of Paul before they end up lowering him in a basket through a crack in Jerusalem's wall. The same thing is true of people with an extra week vacation. Something new is happening. Change is happening.

Okay, so how are these real estate answers?

Mr. Kendall defines my business differently than anyone else I know. I think part of that is that Larry has allowed his perceptual maps to be broadened at every stage of his life. He left Kansas, he stumbled into Fort Collins, but he travels the globe to meet people and learn from them, and ask them questions and listen to their hearts... all...the...time. He grew up with his legs in braces, and today at 60 when he leads his company on their annual retreat, he usually bikes there. Like, to Steamboat Springs... from Fort Collins... via Wyoming. Larry defines my career as "adding value to people's lives." If my perceptual map stays small... I can add value to my life based on my terms. Then I read about the Pharisee of Pharisees on my terms. I enter conversations agenda-driven. I enter relationships with a logical outcome to measure success. I discuss matters of my trade with a dollar-sign orientation. Or...

I can listen to people and hear them as they are. I can ask them more questions. "How did you come to the determination to give that extra week a year to your family? What are some of the things the kids do that tell you camping with you in the woods is what they are dying to do? Why Yellowstone and not say, Rocky Mountain or Lake Powell, what's the dream in Yellowstone that you want to do with your kids?"

February 13, 2008

This is no discount of the condition of sin, nor a statement bashing conventional moral constructions.

Shame debilitates. Soren Kierkegaard said that “life is lived forward but understood backward”. Our shame inclines our perceptual maps to a glance in the backseat of the baggage that we carry. Instead of looking forward on the road that lies ahead, our eyes wander to the right away from the dashboard, our neck begins to crane around and rotate clockwise, our shoulder reverses away from the steering wheel opening up to the expansive side of the still-moving vehicle, our hand starts to poke around the floorboards behind the passenger seat, levering our torso and attention downward while un-earthing gum wrappers, stray pens and discarded chaff from the worn, oil-stained carpet of a vehicle with lots of miles. Shame insidiously takes over the control of our navigation, giving us a life compartmentalized, a body figuratively in the position of control sitting behind the functional operating levers, wheels, pedals and gauges of something already in motion… but with our attention displaced in a distant outpost, detached from our present reality, bogged down in the rubble and debris of the past. That’s shame.

Shame is the antithesis of hope. In the formulation of 20th Century sinners and theologians, Nouwen and Manning, Faith + Hope equals Trust. In the brutal and pragmatic math of life, shame cancels hope, which relegates trust impossible, so we are left with reception of the Word, and nothing more to move us forward. There is no ability for right relationship because trust is impossible. There is no ability to wake and rouse in the morning, whether sunny or bleak because there is no hope. There is faith and there is shame. There… lies confusion.

That’s how shame has operated in my life. In the new math of faith plus hope equals trust, there is no pathway to trust. Notice how there is no shame? Shame is a brilliant debilitation because it deceives. It swoops in, takes out hope, eliminates trust and leaves faith standing there as an empty vessel, a figment of the past with no present relevance and no future prospects.

I have seen it criss-cross my entire post-pubescent history. I see it daily in seller’s worries about the future (where is the hope?). I see it in buyers’ marital discourse (where is the trust?). I see it constantly in the chatter of my profession (where is the hope and the trust?).

February 12, 2008

In generation-speak, my 32-year-old peers are looking down the sites-or the barrels-of history. I don't think many of us truthfully know. Devin was talking today about the money-merge idea, a cool idea and a lot better than what I am presently doing with my money. But the real value of it for our generation is a little deeper than something simple:

We're in the midst of profound climate change

We're in the midst of profound globalization that isn't simply economic.

We're no longer a manufacturing economy. We're an idea economy. A lot of the best ideas are global ideas and they rarely originate in America.

Gen X and subsequent generations are latch-key kids, products of the divorce boom and life post Roe v. Wade. Apparently we were the desired outcome, but maybe the marriages weren't, so, we're used to mixed messages. So trifling retirement details like "social security won't be around for your generation..." yeah, we have issues with trust already.

The luster of being American is not the luster of 1969, 1949, 1919 or 1909. Going backwards, those would be moonwalks, post-Marshall Plan, Post- Great War, post-Roosevelt Administration. We're a young country that was wild once... but we've been dabbling with cosmetic surgery longer than France.

So how did an Obama register with citizens of Colorado Springs?Why does a place that for so long has been happy to go the flow, the status quo, all of a sudden have 33% of registered voters show up for a caucus (okay, those are my Democratic affiliation numbers?)? Is it political zeal? Were the bleeding heart commies finally coming out of the closet?

I don't think so. It isn't for me. I can't elaborate policy differences among candidates. I can't tell you how my REALTOR livelihood would be affected on a day-to-day basis.

What I can tell you is this: we live in an era of incredible change, incredible for it's shifts and incredible in it's speed. So why not admit it and find some hope?As Rob Bell says, we don't have the thing nailed. I sure don't.

Here are some theories:Devin is interested in Money-merge because change has brought about a way to help rein in the finances, take control of them, and kept life fun. I'm interested in buying two investment properties this year because while I'm not the product of divorce, I have my trust issues as does my family. I unfortunately know that it's up to me to learn financial literacy and that I learn best when I fail. I'm self-employed so I'm self-pensioned. I can't be lectured to. Obama is salient because all of a sudden, we are given permission to stop asking why, and start asking "why not?"

My local industry is terrified of a Clinton or Obama presidency. With the number of DOD and military jobs here, that makes sense. The Bush Administration has been terribly good to Colorado Springs economic growth. But it has also perpetuated the cycle of splitting up families for tours in war zones. It has come at the expense of ingenuity and R&D. It has come at the expense of artesian water supplies that are scarce and finite and are being used up so quickly our new Sellers Property Disclosure has a Source of Water Addendum.

Buzz phrases like synchronicity and convergence and karma are great for present tense usage. But you don't need faith if there is no future. Ah, but there is a future. You don't need grace if there isn't a future. Ah, but there is a future.

Hope... Trust. There is a future.

"The next great chapter in the American Story will be written with three words: Yes We Can... We are not a country as divided as our politics suggest."

That future isn't about who is in and who is out. It's a good time to be American again, and the idea of what it means to be an American, may never have been as big, inclusive, hopeful... or touched by grace.

Time for a shameless plug: 7264 Dandelion Ct. Debuted last Tuesday, seven showings already, we got an offer from buyers that wanted $8000 furniture, I guess that's a start towards interest.

In any event, the property really is The Moo... Substantially better condition that you'd expect at the price, two months worth of work before going on the market, priced based on previewing the competition at $215,000. Enjoy...

February 08, 2008

Real quickly, the headlines from Super Tuesday: Clinton and Obama in a dead heat, McCain a runaway winner.

The headline that gets missed: My precint (I'm blue) had zero people to caucus in 2000 and zero in 2004. It had 55 on Tuesday night.

Fifty five out of 174 registered Democrats in the entire Precint 44.

Fifty five more than the nothing that had come out before.

The Democrats turned out 500% more than in 2004 on Tuesday night. Lots of reasons why, but the results are the only things that grabbed the headlines. What caused the headlines is actually a lot more interesting.

Keeping the politics out of it, and on to our local real estate market:Average sales price is around $235,000 now. Down $43,000 from June's peak. Sales units were off 20% from the previous January, which wasn't a great January at all. There are now 10.5 months of homes to sell through.

What caused this? Something much more interesting:Buyers that are buying. Where are they buying? Cheap, not much over $250,000 is selling anywhere. But the under $250,000 is thinking, I have some cash, rates are at a three year low, despite recession worries, political pandemonium (at least for as red a state as this one), my mom, dad and uncle telling me that conventional wisdom says don't buy... a 5.375% interest rate and a seller willing to sell for a fair price and pay my closing costs... that's a good deal. That's who is buying.